What is the effect of CALCRIM No. 220 of the California Criminal Code on the burden of proving each element beyond a reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Arroyo, B219745, Super. Ct. No. KA083888 (Cal. App. 2010):
Appellant's argument that CALCRIM No. 220 deprives defendants of their federal constitutional due process right by failing to advise jurors that the prosecution has the burden of proving "each element" beyond a reasonable doubt has also been considered and rejected. (People v. Henning (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 388, 406.) In Henning, the court held that CALCRIM No. 220, viewed together with other instructions listing the separate elements of the offense correctly informs the jury that the prosecutor was
Page 18
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
